GN 


ANTHROPOLOGY 


•%! 


mi^s'if^^.\'-r 


A    CONTRiBU'iiO.N     lU 

TONGA  X     >^  ^  \r  ATOT  or:\- 


i;.\-l-.lJ 


Memoirs  of  the  Bernice  I'auaiu  bisiiop  Museum 
Volume  YII.I-  -Number  4 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
I     in  2008  with  funding  from 
IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/contributiontotoOOsullrich 


.u:tm^^mmrm^^ 


A   CONTRIBUTION    TO 


TONGAN    SOMATOLOGY 

\ 

By  Louis  R.|  Sullivan 

RASED  OX  TIIK  FIELO  STUDIES  OF  K.  W.  CIFFOKD  AND  W.   C.    MCKKUN 


Memoirs  of  the  Bernice  Pauahi  Bishop  Museum 
Volume  VIII — Number  4 

WITH    PLATES    XXXVI-XXXIX 

BAYARD  DOMINICK  EXPEDITION 
Publication  Number  2 


honolulu,  hawaii 
Bishop  Museum  Press 
1922 


0^ 


X 


A   CONTRIBUTION  TO 
TONGAN   SOMATOLOGY 


By  LOUIS  R.  SULLIVAN 


Based  on  the  field  studies  of  E.  W.  Gifford  and  W.  C.  McKern 

INTRODUCTION 

THE  somatological  studies  in  Tonga  followed  the  plan  previously  used  for 
Samoa.'  The  field  records  were  made  by  E.  W.  Gifford  and  W.  C.  McKern, 
assisted  by  Delila  S.  Giflford  and  show  evidence  of  unusual  care  and  discrimi- 
nation; the  mathematical  computations  were  prepared  by  my  wife,  Bessie  P.  Sul- 
livan. By  arrangement  between  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History  and 
the  Bishop  Museum  the  analysis  of  the  data  and  the  preparation  of  the  results  for 
publication  constitute  my  share  of  the  work. 

Mr.  Gifford  and  Mr.  McKern  call  attention  to  the  assistance  rendered  by 
many  individuals  in  Tonga  and  especially  to  the  kindness  shown  by  Their  Majesties 
Queen  Charlotte  Tupou  and  Prince  Consort  W'illiam  Tungi,  who  permitted  them- 
selves to  be  measured,  thus  graciously  setting  an  example  that  was  gladly  followed 
by  their  loyal  subjects.  The  Privy  Council  also  greatly  aided  the  expedition  by 
instructing  the  Minister  of  Police,  Mr.  Job  Koho,  to  provide  the  required  number 
of  persons  for  each  day's  examinations. 

The  material  on  which  this  paper  is  based  consists  of  complete  descriptions 
and  measurements  of  225  persons,  121  men  and  104  women.  Of  these  10  were  of 
mixed  racial  descent  and  their  records  were  therefore  discarded.  Of  the  remaining 
215,  184  were  adults  more  than  twenty  years  of  age  and  31  adolescents.  The 
averages  of  non-quantitative  descriptions  are  based  on  observations  of  young  and 
old  from  the  age  of  sixteen  upward;  the  averages  of  all  measurements  except 
stature  are  based  on  measurements  of  persons  of  both  sexes  eighteen  years  old 
and  upward. 

By  nativity  the  individuals  examined  are  distributed  as  follows :  Niuatopu- 
tapu  4;  Niuafoou  i;  Vavau  group  25;  Haapai  group  40  (in  detail,  Haano  8,  No- 
muka  2,  Uiha  4,  Lifuka  6,  other  places  20) ;  Tongatabu  148  (Nukualofa  47,  other 
places  loi);  Eua  5;  elsewhere  2.  The  material  was  not  consciously  selected  and 
represents  persons  of  all  social  classes  and  occupations.  It  may  be  regarded  as  a 
fair  qualitative  sample  of  the  Tongan  people. 

'Sullivan,  L.  A.,  A  contribution  to  Samoan  somatology:  B.  P.  Bishop  Mus.  Mem.  vol.  viii,  Xo.  2,  1921. 

[3] 


T6S^ 
ANTHROP, 


769 


234  Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Museum 

According  to  the  Tongan  census  of  1920  there  were  at  that  time  23,128 
Tongans  in  the  group.  Census  returns  for  the  past  twenty  years  show  that  as  a 
whole  the  Tongan  population  is  increasing  slowly.  A  temporary  decrease  was 
shown  in  the  reports  for  19 18  and  19 19,  hut  returns  for  1920  show  a  slight 
increase.  It  is  of  interest  to  notice  also  that  there  has  been  considerably  less  mod- 
ern mixture  with  other  races  than  in  many  other  Polynesian  groups.  'I'he  census 
of  191 7  records  only  300  mixed  bloods.  How  accurate  this  may  be  I  do  not  know, 
but  since  the  same  census  records  only  347  Europeans  and  529  other  Pacific 
islanders,  it  is  apparent  that  there  have  been  fewer  opportunities  and  temptations 
to  marry  outside  the  race  than  there  have  been  in  many  other  places  where  the 
aboriginal  inhabitants  are  greatly  outnumbered  by  the  Europeans  or  Orientals. 
These  facts  should  be  borne  in  mind. 


t4] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology  235 

METHOD 

All  measurcnients  were  taken  in  accordance  with  the  reji^ulations  of  the 
International  Agreement.  The  technicjue  is  described  in  some  detail  in  my  previous 
paper^  but  for  the  sake  of  convenience  is  here  repeated  in  outline.  Each  measure- 
ment and  index  is  numbered,  and  in  the  tables  throughout  this  paper  these  numbers 
refer  consistently  to  the  same  measurements. 

AXTIIROI'OMKTRIC    CuARACI'KRS 

1.  Stature:  recorded  to  the  nearest  centimeter  (shoes  removed). 

2.  Maximum  head  lengfth  :   from  the  glabella  to  the  opisthocranium. 

3.  Maximum  head  width. 

4.  Mininuim  frontal  diameter:    transverse. 

5.  Maximum   face   width  or  bizyg;omatic   diameter. 

6.  Bis:onial  diameter  at  the  angle  of  the  mandible  avoiding  as 

nuich  of  tile  muscles  as  possible. 

7.  .\natomical   face  lieight :    nasion  to  gnathion. 

8.  Nose   height  nasion  to  subnasale. 

9.  Nasal  width :  alare  to  alare. 

10.  Physiognomic  ear  length  or  height. 

11.  Physiognomic  ear  breadth. 

INDICES 

12.  Cephalic  or  length-breadth  index  =  n-.easurement  No    3  X  100 

measurement  No.  2 

IT      tT\  r      .  •  t  1  •    1  measurement  No.  4  X  100 

13.  Transverse  fronto-panetal  nidex  = ^\ 

measurement  No.  3 

14.  Transverse   cephalo-facial   index  ^'"^^^"'"^'"'^"^  No.  5  X  100 

measurement  No.  3 

,  e      -7  i.-      r      *  1    •    1  measurement  No.  4  X  100 

15.  Zygomatico-irontal    mdex  = -^      . 

measurement  No.  5 

(Sometimes  designated  as  the  jugo-frontal  index) 

measurement  No.  6  X  100 


16.     Zygomatico-mandibular  index 


measurement  No.  5 
(Sometimes  designated  as  the  jugo-mandibular  index) 

measurement  No.  7  X  100 


17.     Anatomical  facial  index 


measurement  No.  5 


18.  Nasal  index  ^"measurement  No.  9  X  100  ■ 

measurement  No.  8 

19.  Physiognomic  ear  index  .-  nieasurement  No.  11  X  100 

measurement  Xo.  10 

The  anthropometric  data  were  supplemented  by  observations  on  characters 
not  quantitatively  measurable.  In  view  of  the  widespread  misconception  as  to  the 
nature  of  these  characters  and  their  value  in  somatology,  it  seems  desirable  to 

'Op.  cit. 

[5] 


236  Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 

point  out  in  some  detail  just  what  has  been  attempted  in  describing  characters  that 
do  not  lend  themselves  readily  to  measurement.  The  fact  that  anthropologists  have 
carelessly  spoken  of  "types"  of  hair  form,  hair  color,  or  eye  color  has  given  the 
erroneous  impression — not  only  to  the  general  reader  but  to  many  anthropologists 
as  well — that  these  types  actually  exist  in  nature  and  that  it  is  possible,  for 
example,  to  arrange  all  human  eyes  in  four,  five,  or  six  color  groups.  Although  it 
is  universally  recognized  that  all  characters  that  lend  themselves  to  actual  meas- 
urement show  a  continuous  variation  with  a  tendency  for  a  large  percentage  of  the 
individuals  measured  to  cluster  around  a  median  or  mean  point,  yet  it  is  difficult 
to  dislodge  the  idea  that  other  characters  such  as  color  or  form,  which  cannot  be 
accurately  measured  with  existing  apparatus,  have  a  discontinuous  distribution. 
The  body  height  or  stature  of  the  Scots,  for  example,  ranges  from  158  centimeters 
to  186  centimeters  and  averages  about  172  centimeters.  Very  few  Scotchmen  are 
as  short  as  158  centimeters  and  very  few  are  as  tall  as  186  centimeters.  In  pro- 
gressing from  the  extremes  towards  the  mean  the  number  of  individuals  at  each 
step  increases.  It  is  apparent  to  anyone  who  has  endeavored  to  classify  characters 
which  do  not  lend  themselves  to  measurement  that  in  them  he  is  dealing  with 
exactly  the  same  type  of  continuous  variation.  When  the  metric  rod  cannot  be 
applied,  standards  are  set  up  along  the  range  of  variation,  separated  widely  enough 
to  permit  of  distinguishing  each  from  the  standard  preceding  or  following  it,  and 
an  endeavor  is  made  to  classify  the  material  on  this  basis.  The  attempt  to  classify 
all  existing  forms  of  hair  as  straight,  low  waves,  deep  waves,  curly,  frizzly,  or 
woolly,  produces  results  very  similar  to  those  which  might  be  expected  if  the  stature 
of  all  men  were  measured  with  a  rod  graduated  in  10  centimeter  intervals  from 
130  to  190  centimeters.  A  man's  stature  would  be  recorded  as  130,  140,  150,  160, 
170,  180,  or  190  centimeters;  yet  it  is  obvious  that  the  stature  of  many  men  would 
actually  be  135,  136,  or  137  centimeters.  The  rod  is  not  graduated  finely  enough 
to  record  the  true  distribution  of  the  measurements.  In  a  sense  hair  classes  may 
be  compared  with  these  lo-centimeter  intervals.  For  example,  straight  hair  might 
well  correspond  with  the  130-centimeter  mark  and  woolly  hair  with  the  190-centi- 
meter mark  or  vice  versa.  But  at  this  point  the  analogy  breaks  clown.  It  is  not 
certain  that  low  waves,  deep  waves,  and  other  hair  forms  correspond  exactly  to  the 
140-  and  150-centimeter  points.  Roughly  they  probably  do.  But  by  far  the  great- 
est diflference  in  the  two  methods  and  one  that  should  always  be  kept  in  mind  in 
the  analysis  of  data  is  that  in  the  classification  of  these  descriptive  or  attribute 
characters,  so  called,  the  "metric  rod"  exists  only  in  the  mind  of  the  observer  and 
is  by  no  means  a  vmiform  or  universal  standard.  This  lack  of  a  fixed  standard 
makes  difficult  not  only  the  comparison  of  small  differences  found  by  different 
observers,  but  also  to  a  lesser  extent  those  found  at  different  times  by  the  same 
observer.     As  the  standard  is  purely  visual,  constructed  largely  upon  the  expe- 

[6] 


Sullivan — Tougan  Somatology  2},'] 

riences  of  each  observer,  it  necessarily  fluctuates  constantly,  varying  with  new 
experiences. 

Despite  the  varying-  standards  many  of  these  non-measurable  characters 
have  proved  to  be  of  such  great  value  in  jointing  out  racial  similarities  and  differ- 
ences that  no  general  somatological  study  is  justified  in  omitting  them.  In  ]X)inting 
out  the  sources  of  error  in  data  of  this  sort  it  is  not  my  purpose  to  belittle  their 
value  or  to  imply  that  the  size  of  the  error  is  uniform  for  all  characters.  Although 
two  observers  might  disagree  as  to  whether  a  given  sample  of  hair  were  low- 
waved,  or  straight,  yet  they  would  be  nmch  less  likely  to  disagree  as  to  whether 
it  were  straight  or  deeply  waved,  and  still  less  likely  to  disagree  as  to  whether  it 
were  straight  or  curly.     The  same  considerations  apply  to  color. 

Recognizing  then  the  fact  of  the  continuous  variation  in  these  characters,  I 
have  described  them  as  if  they  were  discontinuous.  For  purposes  of  this  paper  hair 
form  is  classified  as  straight,  low-waved,  deep-waved,  curly,  frizzly,  and  woolly, 
and  the  color  is  designated  as  black,  dark  brown,  reddish-brown,  light  brown, 
blond,  golden,  red,  and  gray.  The  amount  of  beard  on  the  ujjper  cheek,  lower 
cheek,  and  chin  and  the  amount  of  lK)dy  hair  on  the  chest,  forearm,  and  leg  was 
described  as  none,  slight,  medium,  and  heavy.  Eye  color  is  classified  as  black, 
dark  brown,  and  light  brown,  blue,  gray,  blue-brown,  and  gray-brown.  The 
amount  of  conjunctival  ])igment  is  classified  roughly  in  accordance  with  the  appear- 
ance of  the  scelera — white  and  clear,  muddy,  speckled,  or  mottled.  The  develop- 
ment or  lack  of  development  of  the  epicanthic  (Mongoloid)  eye  fold  is  described 
as  absent,  slight,  medium,  or  marked.    The  elevation  of  the  nasal  bridge  has  been 


FiGURK  1.    Diagram  illustrating  terminology  used  to  describe  the 

form  of  the  nostrils :     A,  antero-posterior  nostrils ;    B,  obliquely 

placed  nostrils ;    C,  transverse  nostrils. 

estimated  in  terms  of  low,  medium,  or  high.  The  form  and  direction  of  the  nos- 
trils are  roughly  classed,  according  to  the  direction  of  the  long  axis  of  each  nostril, 
as  antero-posterior,  oblique,  or  transverse.  (See  figs,  i  and  2.)  The  slope  of  the 
forehead  is  estimated  as  vertical,  moderate  slope,  or  low.  The  development  of  the 
glabella  is  indicated  by  the  terms  smooth,  medium,  and  prominent.     The  thickness 

[7] 


238  Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 

of  the  lijjs  is  recorded  as  thin,  medium,  or  thick.  Prog'nathism,  which  in  a  hving 
person  is  a  complex  and  somewhat  elusive  character,  is  described  as  absent,  slight, 
medium,  or  marked.  In  the  ears  the  development  of  the  lobes  (small  or  large, 
attached  or  separate),  the  roll  of  the  helix  (rolled  one-third,  two-thirds,  three- 
thirds,  or  flat),  and  the  presence  or  absence  of  Darwin's  tubercle  were  recorded. 
Particular  care  was  taken  to  record  the  form  of  the  upper  incisor  teeth  with 
a  view  to  determining  the  presence  or  absence  of  the  shovel-shaped  incisors. 
Although  primarily  described  by  Hrdlicka"  as  shovel-shaped  this  condition  of  the 
incisor  and  other  teeth  has  more  recently  been  described  by  the  same  author  as 
keilodonty  and  koilomorphy.  As  the  fossa  is  dependent  on  the  formation  of  the 
rim,  it  will  be  sufficiently  clear  and  less  cumbersome  to  discuss  this  condition  in 
terms  of  rim  development  or  keilodonty.  In  this  i)aper  classes  of  no  rim,  trace  of 
rim,  medium  rim,  and  marked  rim  correspond  to  Hrdlicka's  classes  of  no  shovel, 
plain  trace,  semi-shovel,  shovel-shaped.  The  condition  is  well  described  by 
Hrdlicka:'  "The  lingual  surface  of  the  well  developed  shovel-shaped  incisor  is 
very  striking.  The  usual  moderate  concavity  from  above  downward  is  replaced  by 
a  triangular  to  rounded  or  oblong  deep  fossa.  The  base  of  the  fossa  is  formed  by 
the  free  edge  of  the  tooth,  its  summit  reaches  uinvards  near  to  the  gum.  The  fossa 
is  bounded  laterally  and  generally  also  distally,  hence  on  all  sides  by  a  stout  rim 
of  enamel." 


DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  TONGANS 

The  results  of  the  seriation  and  averages  are  summarized  in  Tables  I,  II, 
and  III.  In  Table  I  we  find  a  fairly  normal  distribution  in  all  anthropometric 
characters.  The  number  of  persons  concerned  in  each  character  is  so  small  that 
any  departure  from  the  normal  cannot  be  regarded  too  seriously.  Doubling  the 
class  interval  is  usually  sufficient  to  smooth  the  curve.  Even  after  doing  this, 
however,  the  distribution  of  head  length  and  face  width  present  a  somewhat  skewed 
distribution.  Indications  of  bimodality  are  also  noticeable  in  the  bigonial  diameter, 
face  height,  and  face  index  distribution.  At  present  the  significance  or  non-signifi- 
cance of  these  facts  is  not  clear. 


'  Hrdlicka,  Ales,  Shovel-shaped  teeth ;  Am.  Jour,  of  Phys.  Anthr.,  vol.  in,  p.  429,  1920. 
'  Op.  cit.,  p.  429. 

[8] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology 


239 


TABLE    I. — SERIATION    OF    ANTHROPOMETRIC    CHARACTERS    IN    ABSOLUTE     NUMBERS 
STATURE 


Centimeters 
130 
1 
2 
3 
4 


Male 


Female 
1 
0 
1 
1 
4 


2.   HEAD  LENGTH 
Millimeters     Male        Female 
170 


1 
2 

3 

4 


1 
0 


2 
0 
1 

2 
1 


3.    HEAD    WIDTH 
Millimeters     Male        Female 


140 
1 
2 

3 

4 


1 
1 
2 
2 
6 


4.    MINIMUM    FRONTAL 

Millimeters     Male        Female 

90    


1 

2 
3 
4 


1 
0 
2 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


2 
1 
5 
4 
6 


6 
7 
8 
9 


0 
1 
0 
0 
0 


1 
2 
6 
4 

5 


6 

7 
8 
9 


1 
2 
2 

5 
3 


7 
9 
7 

5 
9 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


1 

2 
2 
1 
3 


3 

0 

4 

5 

11 


160 
1 
2 
3 
4 


1 
1 
0 
0 
1 


7 
7 
7 
6 
4 


180 
1 
2 

3 
4 


0 

2 
9 
4 


6 

5 

4 

12 

4 


150 
1 
2 
3 

4 


6 

6 

6 

10 

13 


8 
8 
4 
2 
6 


100 
1 
2 
3 

4 


8 

4 

10 

11 

14 


7 
7 
7 
7 
7 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


5 
3 
5 
1 

5 


5 
4 
3 
2 
6 


6 
7 
8 
9 


2 
9 

5 
4 

7 


2 
4 
9 
3 

5 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


12 

15 

7 

8 

6 


9 
0 
3 
2 
1 


6 
7 
8 
9 


14 
8 
5 
6 
3 


10 

5 
5 
4 
4 


170 
1 
2 
3 
4 


9 
3 
7 
6 
10 


190 
1 
2 

3 

4 


10 
9 

5 
7 
5 


4 
0 
4 
1 


160 
1 
2 
3 
4 


5 
2 
4 
1 
1 


0 
2 
1 
1 
0 


110 
11 
12 
13 

14 


7 
4 
2 
1 
2 


1 
2 
1 
0 
4 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

180 
1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


4 
8 
8 
3 
3 

2 
4 
1 
1 
0 

0 
0 
0 
1 
0 


Total   92 


0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
1 


88 


5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

200 
1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


4 
3 
4 
2 

7 

1 
2 

2 
0 
4 

1 
0 
0 
0 
0 


4 
1 
1 
1 
0 

0 

1 


210 

1 

11 

0 

12 

0 

13 

1 

14 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

170 
1 
2 
3 
4 


0 
0 
2 


Total   117 


97 


Total   117 


97 


15 
16 
17 
18 
19 


3 
1 
0 
0 
1 


Total   116 


96 


[9] 


240 


Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Miiscimi 


5.    FACE    WIDTH 

6. 

BIGONIAL 

Millimeters 

Male 

Female 

Millimeters 

Male 

Fem 

120 

.... 

90 

3 

1 

, 

1 

2 

9 

1 

2 

i 

3 

3 

0 

3 

1 

4 

4 

1 

4 

2 

2 

3 

0 

5 

4 

3 

6 

1 

6 

9 

10 

7 

1 

7 

1 

11 

8 

2 

8 

2 

3 

9 

1 

9 

6 

7 

130 

6 

100 

9 

14 

1 

2 

5 

1 

7 

7 

2 

2 

4 

2 

10 

5 

3 

4 

6 

3 

8 

4 

4 

0 

6 

4 

9 

4 

3 

3 

^ 

5 

4 

3 

6 

1 

6 

6 

5 

5 

7 

1 

10 

7 

4 

4 

8 

7 

10 

8 

9 

0 

9 

8 

3 

9 

5 

0 

140 

8 

3 

110 

5 

0 

1 

9 

6 

11 

8 

1 

2 

11 

4 

12 

3 

0 

3 

/ 

2 

13 

2 

0 

4 

6 

4 

14 

1 

0 

5 

7 

3 

15 

4 

1 

6 

6 

2 

16 

2 

/ 

8 

0 

17 

0 

8 

2 

0 

18 

1 

9 

7 

2 

19 

1 

.... 

150 

4 

0 

Total 

116 

96 

1 

2 

1 

2 

3 

1 

3 

2 

0 

4 

1 

1 

5 

1 

6 

0 

' 

7 

1 

8 

1 

9 

2 

.... 

Total 

116 

97 

7.    FACE    HEIGHT 
Millimeters     Male        Female 

100  

1  

2 

3  "Z.  Z 

4  1 

5  0 

6  0 

7  0 

8  0 

9  0 

110  0 

11  0 

12  2     0 

13  0     0 

14  0     2 


15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

120 
1 
2 
3 

4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

130 
1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

140 
1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


1 
0 
1 
3 
6 

6 
7 
3 
2 

4 

6 
2 
6 

9 

5 

8 
7 
8 
6 
6 

6 
2 
2 
1 
1 

2 

0 
1 
1 
0 

1 

0 

1 


1 

3 

5 

2 

11 

5 
0 
7 
8 

7 

7 
6 
2 
11 
3 

5 
3 
2 
1 
1 

1 
0 
1 
0 
1 


Total   116 


97 


8.  NOSE    HEIGHT 
Millimeters     Male        Female 

40    

1    

2 

3  Z...  ..'. 

4    

5    

6    

7  1 

8  2 

9  0  3 


50 
1 
2 

3 

4 

5 
6 
7 


60 
1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 


2 
0 

5 
5 
7 

15 

15 

13 

6 

7 

11 
7 
9 

5 
4 


Total   117 


2 
2 

6 
6 

7 

9 

15 

9 

7 
7 

10 
6 
3 
1 
0 

2 
1 
1 


97 


[10] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology 


241 


9- 

NOSE    WIDTH 

10.   EAR    HEIGHT 

II. 

EAR    WIDTH 

12.   CEPHALIC 

INDEX 

illimete 

30 
1 
2 
3 
4 

rs     Male        Female 

Millimeters     Male        Female 

50           

1           

2      : 

Millimeters     Male        Female 
20           

1           

2         

3         

4         

Index           Male 
70 
1 
2 

3  1 

4  2 

Feiti 
"2 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

!"!.'.         1 

4 

1        10 

7            6 

5         

6  2             1 

7  2             1 

8  2             2 

9  2             3 

5 
6 
7 
8 

9 

1 
0 
0 
1 

1             3 

5  0 

6  5 

7  3 

8  10 

9  15 

2 
8 
4 
8 
8 

40 
1 
2 
3 
4 

3           10 

9           11 

12           15 

10          13 

22          10 

60            3             9 

1  2            8 

2  14            6 

3  8           13 

4  13             9 

30 
1 
2 
3 

4 

5             9 

4             7 

7           19 

18           12 

25           18 

80           19 

1  13 

2  12 

3  14 

4  6 

9 

10 

9 

9 

5 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

15            5 
9            6 

10            3 
8            2 
6            0 

5  9           12 

6  9             5 

7  12            6 

8  11             6 

9  4             3 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

13           11 

16           11 

10             2 

9             2 

3             2 

5  6 

6  3 

7  4 

8  2 

9  2 

4 
6 
4 
4 
2 

SO 
1 
2 
3 
4 

3            1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

70             7             5 

1  4             2 

2  5             2 

3  0             2 

4  1             1 

40 
1 
2 
3 

4 

2             0 
0             1 
1 

90 
1 
2 
3 
4 

0 
2 

1 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

1 

5  4             1 

6  0 

7  1 

8  0 

9  1 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 



5 

.... 

Total 

117           97 

80             1 

1         

2         

3         

4         

5         

Total 

116           97 

Total      117 

97 

Total      117           97 

[II] 


242 


Memoirs  Bcrnicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 


13.   FRONTO-l'ARIETAL 
Index           Male        Female 
55           

6         

7        

8        

9  2 

14.    CEPIIALO-FACIAL 
Index           Male        Female 
80           

1           

2         

3         

4         2 

15.    ZVCOMATICO- 
Index           Male 
60 
1 
2 

3  3 

4  0 

FRONTAL 
Female 

16.  ZVGMATICO-MAN 
Index           Male 
60 
1 
2 

3  1 

4  2 

DIBUL 
Fema 

"3 

60            1 

1  2             1 

2  4             1 

3  3             2 

4  6            6 

5  1             2 

6  2             3 

7  2             5 

8  6           10 

9  6            9 

5  1 

6  4 

7  2 

8  6 

9  3 

"1 

0 

1 
1 

5  3 

6  1 

7  4 

8  4 

9  7 

'2 
3 

4 
7 

5  11             2 

6  17          15 

7  9          11 

8  14           10 

9  12           12 

90           13             9 

1  14           11 

2  19             8 

3  8           11 

4  15            14 

70           14 

1  6 

2  15 

3  10 

4  11 

3 
3 
9 
11 
7 

70             7 

1  12 

2  10 

3  11 

4  17 

9 
13 
8 
9 
9 

70           11             8 

1  10           12 

2  7            5 

3  4             3 

4  2            6 

5  4             3 

6  6              4 

7  10             5 

8  2             0 

9  4             0 

5  9 

6  8 

7  5 

8  5 

9  6 

15 

15 

10 

6 

3 

5  6 

6  5 

7  10 

8  4 

9  2 

11 
4 
6 
4 

5 

5  0            0 

6  0             2 

7  0             1 

8  0 

9  0 

100             2              1 

1  0 

2  1 

3  1 

4         

80             5 

1  0 

2  1 

3  1 

4  1 

5 
3 
2 
1 
0 

80            0 

1  5 

2  1 

3  1 

4  0 

.... 

80             0 

1  0 

2  1 

3         

4         

Total      116            97 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

0 

1 

5  1 

6  1 

7  1 
8 

9 

.... 

Total      1 16           97 

Total      116 

97 

Total      116 

97 

[I2J 


Sullivan — Toiigan  Somatology 


243 


17.     ANATOMICAL 

FACE 

lIKKillT 

Index 

Male 

I'eiiiale 

70 

1 

.... 

2 

3 

.... 

4 

.... 

5 

6 

7 

8 

""2 

.... 

9 

0 

80 

2 

1 

2 

2 

2 

3 

2 

"1 

4 

6 

1 

5 

3 

5 

6 

10 

9 

7 

14 

5 

8 

5 

9 

9 

11 

11 

90 

13 

8 

1 

9 

9 

2 

10 

10 

3 

4 

6 

4 

10 

3 

5 

2 

5 

6 

5 

4 

7 

2 

2 

8 

1 

9 

0 

100 

0 

1 

....„ 

2 

2 

2 

3 

0 

4 

.... 

5 

6 

0 

7 

1 

8 

9 

Total      116 


97 


18. 

NASAI,  INDEX 

19. 

EAR    INDEX 

Index 

Male 

Female 

Index 

Male 

Feni 

60 

40 

1 

1 

"1 

1 

0 

2 

0 

2 

1 

3 

1 

3 

0 

"1 

4 

1 

"2 

4 

1 

0 

5 

2 

1 

5 

1 

2 

6 

5 

7 

6 

2 

6 

7 

0 

4 

7 

5 

4 

8 

5 

7 

8 

5 

9 

9 

2 

1 

9 

9 

9 

70 

4 

8 

50 

11 

~7 

1 

6 

11 

1 

10 

4 

2 

2 

5 

2 

16 

16 

3 

6 

6 

3 

11 

10 

4 

3 

3 

4 

9 

8 



— 

5 

6 

5 

5 

6 

5 

6 

6 

5 

6 

13 

5 

7 

7 

4 

7 

4 

3 

8 

5 

3 

8 

3 

1 

9 

8 

3 

9 

1 

3 

— 

— 

80 

10 

.S 

60 

5 

2 

1 

7 

3      . 

1 

2 

1 

2 

7 

4 

2 

0 

3 

2 

1 

3 

1 

4 

4 

3 

— 



Total 

116 

97 

5 

2 

1 

6 

1 

0 

7 

4 

3 

8 

1 

1 

9 

3 

1 

90 

0 

1 

2 

2 

1 

3 

0 

4 

0 

5 

0 

6 

1 

7 

0 

8 

1 

9 

.... 

100 

..- 

106 

1 

z 

Total      117 


97 


[13] 


244 


Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 


TABLE    II. — SUMMARY    OF    ANTHROPOMETRIC  CHARACTERS    OF    TONGANS 

CHARACTER  MALIC                                                                   FEMALE 

92  to  117  persons  88  to  97  persons 

Average  E^          S.  D.  V  Average  Ea          S.  D.  V 

1  Stature   173.0  .54       5.21  3.01  162.5  .62        5.83  3.58 

2  Head  length 191.0  .63       6.89  3.60  184.1  .65       6.47  3.51 

3  Head  width 154.8  .39       4.26  2.75  150.0  .51        5.06  3.37 

4  Min.  frontal 104.8  .45       4.87  4.64  103.0  .47       4.65  4.51 

5  Face  width 143.5  .55        5.94  4.13  136.1  .61        6.03  4.43 

6  Big-onial    104.8  .54        5.81  5.54  99.2  .49       4.80  4.83 

7  Face  height 128.2  .63       6.81  5.31  124.1  .58       5.79  4.66 

8  Nose  height 57.5  .36       3.91  6.80  56.7  .38       3.75  6.61 

9  Nose  width 44.4  .27       3.02  6.80  41.9  .29       2.86  6.82 

10  Ear  height 66.0  .42       4.57  6.92  64.5  .40       3.97  6.15 

11  Ear  width 34.5  .24       2.62  7.59  33.4  .23        2.35  7.03 

12  Cephalic  index 81.1  .29       3.14  3.87  81.6  .41        4.09  5.01 

13  Fronto-parietal  index 67.6  .32       3.51  5.19  68.7  M       3.22  4.68 

14  Cephalo-facial  index 92.8  .43       4.68  5.04  91.2  22       3.23  3.54 

15  Zygomatico-frontal   index 73.1  .39       4.23  5.78  75.4  .33       3.33  4.41 

16  Zygomatico  mandibular  index       73.2  .42       4.56  6.22  72.5  .36       3.57  4.92 

17  Facial  index 89.2  .41        4.43  4.96  90.8  .43       4.32  4.75 

18  Nasal  index 77.6  .70       7.58  9.76  74.2  .62       6.15  8.28 

19  Ear  index 52.4  .36       3.93  7.50  51.8  .39       3.93  7.58 

a  In  this  table  E  =  propable  error  of  the  average,  S.  D.  =  standard  deviation,  and  V  =  coefficient  of 
variation  in  percentage. 


TABLE    III. — SUMMARY    OF    ATTRIBUTE    CI-I.\RACTERS    OF    TONGANS 

CHARACTER  MALE  FEMALE 

Skin   Color:  Von   Luschan's   scale 

Unexposed  Nos.  14,  15,  16  Nos.  13,  14,  15,  16 

Exposed   Nos.  15,  16,  17,  18,  22,  23  Nos.  15,  16,  17,  18,  22 

Hair  form:  Number  Percent  Number                      Percent 

Straight    49  .41.5  33                         34.4 

Low  waves 49  41.5  45                         46.9 

Deep  waves 17  14.4  12                         12.5 

Curly  : 3  2.5  S                           5.2 

Frizzly 0  0  1                           1.0 

Woolly    0  0  0                             0 

Totals   118  96 

Hair  color:  Number  Percent  Number                      Percent 

Black    Ill  94.1  85                        87.6 

Dark  brown  5  4.2  4                           4.1 

Reddish  brown 1»  .8  7*                          7.2 

Light   brown 0  0  0                             0 

Blond    0  0  0                           -0 

Golden 0  0  0                             0 

Red  P  .8  0                             0 

Gray    0  0  1                           1.0 

Totals  118  97 

«  Bleached  with  lime. 

[14] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology 


245 


CHARACTER  MALES    ONLY 

Amount  of   Beard:  Upper  cheek  Lower  cheek 

None  2.1  4.2 

Scant  15.8  37,2 

Medium 33.7  18.1 

Heavy  48^4 404 

Amount  of  body  hair:  On  chest  On  forearm 

None  23.4  0 

Scant  28.7  10.5 

Medium    25.5  43.2 

Heavy  22^3 46J 

MALE 

Eye  color:  Number  Percent                 Number 

Black  4  34                     15 

Dark  brown  Ill  941                      79 

Light  brown  3  2.5                        2 

Blue    0  0                        1 

Gray 0  0                       0 

Blue-brown    0  0                         0 

Gray-brown   0  0                        0 

Total  118 97 

Conjunctiva  Number  Percent                 Number 

Clear  22  18.8                      41 

Not  clear  9.S  81.2                      55 

Total  117 96 

Epicanthic  eye  fold  Number  Percent                 Number 

Absent 63  56.8                     52 

Trace    2,2>  29.7                     26 

Mediimi    9  8.1                      14 

Marked  6  54                       5 

Total  Ill 97 

Nasal  bridge  Number  Per  cent                 Number 

Low  21  21.7                     29 

Medium    81  704                     64 

High  9  7.8                       2 

Total  Ill 95 

Axes  of  nostrils  a  Number  Percent                 Number 

Anterior-posterior  2  1.7                        5 

Oblique  90  78.3                      66 

Transverse  23  20.0                      24 

Total  115  95 

Slope  of  forehead  Number  Per  cent                 Number 

Vertical    70  60.3                     81 

Moderate    4,S  38.8                      15 

Low  1  .9                      0 

Total  116  96 

a  See  figs,  i  and  2. 

[IS] 


Chin 

0 

19.4 

30.6 

50.0 


On  legs 

0 

7.2, 

66.7 

26.0 


FEMALE 


Per  cent 

15.5 

81.4 

2.1 

1.0 

0 

0 

0 


Per  cent 

42.7 
57.3 


Per  cent 

53.6 
26.8 
144 

5.2 


Per  cent 

30.5 

674 

2.1 


Per  cent 

5.3 

69.5 

253 


Per  cent 
84.4 
15.6 
0 


246 


Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 


CII.\R.\CTKR 

C/labella  Ntitiiber 

Smooth  55 

Medium    48 

Prominent    9 

Total  112 

Lips  Number 

Thin    12 

Medium    97 

Thick    7 

Total  116 

Prognathism  Number 

None  63 

Slight    26 

Medium 29 

Marked  0 

Total  118 

Ear  lobe  Number 

None  5 

Small  separate  48 

Small  attached  48 

Large  separate  9 

Large  attached  5 

Total  115 

Helix  roll  Number 

Flat  0 

Rolled  fir.st  Va  20 

Rolled  first  %  67 

Rolled   throughout   31 

Total  118 

Darwin's  tubercle  Number 

Present   25 

Keilodonty  Number 
Lateral   incisor  teeth 

No  rim  48 

Trace  of  rim  49 

Medium  rim    /  17 
Marked  rim     \ 

Mesial  incisor  teeth 

No  rim 66 

Trace  of  rim  34 

Medium  rim    )  -ia 
Marked  rim     j 

Total  114 


MALF. 


FEM.XLE 


Per  cent 

49.1 

42.8 

8.0 


Number 
81 
15 
1 

97 


Per  cent 
83.5 

15.5 
1.0 


Per  cent 

Number 

Per  cent 

10.3 

10 

10.3 

83.6 

85 

87.6 

6.0 

2 

2.1 

97 


Per  cent 

Number 

Per  cent 

53.3 

45 

46.4 

22.0 

36 

37.1 

24.6 

15 

15.5 

0 

1 

1.0 

97 


er  cent 

Number 

Per  cent 

4.3 

2 

2.1 

41.7 

37 

38.5 

41.7 

44 

45.8 

7.8 

8 

8.3 

4.3 

5 

5.2 

96 


Per  cent 

Number 

Per  cent 

0 

2 

2.1 

16.1 

34 

35.4 

56.8 

48 

50.0 

26.3 

12 

12.5 

96 


Per  cent 
21.4 


Number 

5 


Per  cent 

5.2 


'er  cent 

Number 

Per  cent 

42.1 
42.9 

33 
37 

36.3 
40.6 

14.9 

21 

23.1 

57.9 
29.8 

57 
24 

62.6  ' 
26.4 

12.3 

10 

10.9 

91 


[16] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology  247 

The  results  summarized  in  Tables  II  and  III  show  that  the  Tongans  are 
among  the  tallest  groups  of  mankind.  The  men  average  173  centimeters  or  about 
5  feet  8  inches  in  height.  On  the  average  the  women  are  10  centimeters,  or 
4  inches,  shorter.  'IMie  head  is  both  long  and  broad  yielding  an  average  index  of 
81. 1  for  the  men  and  81.6  for  the  women.  There  is  no  assurance,  however,  that  these 
are  the  natural  diameters  of  the  Tongan  head.  In  the  skeletal  material  brought 
back  by  Gifford  and  McKern,  seven  crania  were  in  a  fair  state  of  preservation. 
With  the  single  exception  of  one  cranium  of  a  young  child  all  of  these  crania 
showed  a  moderate  to  a  pronounced  degree  of  occipital  flattening  accompanied  by 
marked  asymmetry,  pointing  clearly  to  the  fact  that  they  had  been  artificially 
deformed.  The  cranial  length-breadth  indices  were  82.7,  84.5,  86.0,  86.0,  88.2,  and 
93.7.    These  average  86.8. 

At  my  request  inquiries  were  made  by  Gifford  and  McKern  as  to  the  preva- 
lence and  methods  of  head  deformation.  The  information  shows  that  the  Tongans 
in  the  past  and  to  some  extent  at  the  present  time  shape  the  heads  of  children,  but 
the  description  of  the  methods  employed  throws  no  light  on  the  deformation  seen 
in  the  crania.  According  to  several  informants  the  child  was  laid  on  a  piece  of  tapa 
with  the  top  of  its  head  placed  against  a  heavy  block  of  squared  wood,  the  pressure 
tending  to  flatten  the  top  of  the  cranium.  The  deformation  described  above  is 
decidedly  not  of  this  type.  Since  this  procedure  is  said  to  have  been  continued  for 
one  month  only,  its  effect  may  be  considered  as  negligible.  It  is  difficult  to  under- 
stand how  it  would  have  any  appreciable  effect  even  if  continued  indefinitely,  since 
the  amount  of  pressure  involved  must  have  been  very  slight. 

In  the  Tongan  skeletal  material  that  I  examined,  the  tops  of  the  crania  show 
no  evidences  of  flattening.  The  deformation  on  these  Tongan  crania  is  very  simi- 
lar to  that  observed  in  the  crania  of  many  groups  of  Indians  in  the  southwestern 
United  States.  Occipital  flattening  is  usually  thought  to  be  accidental — at  least  in 
origin.  When  the  effect  of  it  was  once  recognized,  conscious  effort  may  have  been 
made  in  certain  groups  to  duplicate  by  artificial  means  the  results  obtained  by 
accident.  The  hard  beds  and  wooden  pillows  that  are  still  in  use  among  the 
Tongans  suggest  a  possible  explanation  of  the  occipital  flattening,  as  it  is  known 
that  a  certain  amount  of  deformation  or  flattening  is  easily  brought  about  by  hard 
pillows,  particularly  in  i)ersons  who  are  naturally  short  headed.  Examples  of  such 
accidental  ^flattening  of  the  occiput  are  numerous  among  the  Chinese,  Japanese,  and 
Koreans.  The  only  difficulty  involved  in  this  ex])lanation  is  to  account  for  the 
difference  between  the  degree  of  deformation  found  in  the  living  series  and  that  in 
the  cranial  series.  It  is  known  that  the  crania  are  not  modern.  The  average 
length-breadth  index  of  these  crania  is  nearly  6  points  higher  than  the  same  index 
in  the  living.  On  the  whole,  while  the  implication  is  that  deformation  is  not  so 
prevalent  at  present  as  in  the  past,  it  seems  better  to  base  no  generalization  on  the 

[17] 


248 


Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 


form  of  the  head.  Directly  or  indirectly,  minimum  frontal  diameter,  transverse 
fronto-parietal  index  and  cephalo-facial  index  would  also  be  somewhat  altered  in 
persons  with  deformed  occiputs.  On  account  of  the  very  close  correspondence  of 
Tongans  and  Samoans  in  cephalic  index  it  is  obvious  that  this  caution  should  be 
extended  to  the  Samoan  data'*  as  well. 

The  transverse  and  vertical  diameters  of  the  Tongan  face  and  its  component 
parts  are  so  large  that  the  face  and  nose  may  both  well  be  described  as  massive. 
The  skin  is  a  medium  yellowish-brown  where  it  is  unexposed  to  wind  and  sun. 


Figure  2.     Tong^an  nostrils  arranged  roughly  according  to  the  orienta- 
tion of  the  axes.     Photographs  hy  Gifford  and  McKern. 

Exposed  parts  of  the  skin  of  a  few  of  the  persons  were  a  very  dark  chocolate- 
brown.  The  hair  may  be  described  as  black,  of  medium  coarseness,  and  either 
straight  or  slightly  waved.  The  beard  is  moderately  developed  and  the  amount  of 
body-hair  on  the  chest,  arms,  and  legs  may  also  be  described  as  somewhat  below 
the  average.  The  eyes  are  dark  brown  in  color  and  a  considerable  amount  of  con- 
junctival pigment  is  normal.  The  epicanthic  eye  fold  is  typically  absent,  but  nearly 
30  per  cent  showed  what  is  termed  a  "trace"  of  this  fold,  and  a  few  marked 
examples  of  it  were  noted. 

'  B.  P.  Bishop  Mus.  Mem.  vol.  viii,  No.  2,  1921. 

[18] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology  249 

The  eyes  of  Tongans  as  a  group  are  less  wide  open  than  are  the  eyes  of 
Caucasian  peoples.  The  types  illustrated  in  Nos.  3,  4,  5,  and  6  in  Plate  xxxvi,  A, 
are  most  common.  They  are  characterized  by  being  placed  somewhat  obliquely 
with  just  a  suggestion  of  an  epicanthic  fold,  and  by  a  slightly  thickened  and 
bevelled  lower  lid.  No.  8  has  a  well-marked  epicanthic  fold  and  No.  7  a  definite 
trace  of  it. 

The  nose  of  the  Tongan  is  worthy  of  some  detailed  description  and  com- 
parison. As  judged  by  the  standard  of  the  European  nose  the  nasal  bridge  of 
Tongans  cannot  be  said  to  be  highly  arched.  (See  PI.  xxxviii,  A  and  B.) 
It  is  j)revailingly  of  medium  or  low  elevation  from  the  face.  The  nostrils  are  some- 
what oval  in  shape  with  the  long  axis  tending  to  run  in  an  oblique  or  transverse 
direction. 

Although,  as  expressed  by  the  nasal  index,  the  Tongan  has  what  is  usually 
termed  a  moderately  broad  or  mesorrhine  nose,  yet  by  absolute  measurement  the 
nasal  width  is  exceeded  only  by  that  of  a  few  Negroid  groups.  (See  Pis. 
XXXVI  and  xxxix.)  In  Table  IV  I  have  given  some  comparative  data  on  the 
range  of  the  nasal  index  for  given  widths  of  nose.  It  is  not  at  all  unusual  to  find 
groups  with  identical  nasal  widths  varying  by  20  points  in  nasal  index.  This 
leads  me  to  believe  that  unless  the  absolute  diameters  are  somewhat  nearly  alike  in 
two  groups  a  correspondence  in  nasal  index  should  not  be  taken  too  seriously.  The 
enormous  proportions  of  the  Tongan  (and  also  of  the  Samoan)  nose  are  approached 
only  by  certain  American  Indian  groups.  The  Tongans,  the  Samoans,  the  Chip- 
pewa Indians,  the  Egyptians,  the  Ilokos,  the  Kirghez,  the  Khotan,  and  the  Polish 
Jews  have  nasal  indices  averaging  from  72.6  to  78.0.  Does  it  follow  that  their 
noses  are  very  similar?  Not  at  all.  In  some  cases  the  low  nasal  index  is  the 
result  of  the  great  height  of  the  nose  and  in  spite  of  the  great  width.  This  is  true 
of  the  Tongans,  Samoans,  and  Chippewa  Indians.  In  the  others  it  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  noses  are  of  moderate  width  and  height.  So  it  seems  that  the  use  of 
the  nasal  index  should  at  least  be  supplemented  by  absolute  measurements. 


[19] 


250 


Memoirs  Bern  ice  P.  Bishop  Museum 


TABLK    IV.       COMPARISON    OF    NASAL    WIDTH,    NASAL    HEIGHT,    AND    NASAL     INDICES    ARRANGED    IN 

ORDER   OF    MAGNITUDF.   OF    NASAL    WIDTH. 

NASAL 
CROUP  WIDTH 

Kajji,  Nigeria  43.0 

Mawambi   pygmy  45.0 

Tonga   44.4 

Toricelli,  New  Guinea  44.3 

Fan    44.0 

Kagoro,  Nigeria  44.0 

Sentani,  New  Guinea  44.0 

Humboldt  Bay,  New  Guinea  44.0 

Samoa     43.8 

Shoshoni    Amerindian    43.4 

Chippewa  Amerindian  42.8 

Negrito,  Zambales  42.8 

Maricopa   Amerindian   41.4 

Tagalog  Bulakan   41.0 

Tagalog,  Rizal  41.0 

Risaya    Iloilo   41.0 

Nahuqua    Amerindian    40.5 

Iloko,   Iloko.s   Norte   40.0 

Senoi     40.0 

Dolan,  Turkestan  39.9 

Suhanun 39.9 

Sioux   Amerindian    39.9 

Sundanese    39.0 

Banjerese    38.8 

Kirghiz  38.2 

Dombs,    India   38.0 

Aino    38.0 

Nabaloi,   Benguet  38.0 

South  Andamanese  37.7 

Egyptian    i7.2> 

Polish  Jew  37.0 

Little  Russian  Jew  37.0 

Khotan,  Turkestan  36.9 

The  forehead  of  the  Tongan  is  well  developed  and  presents  a  rather  gradual 
slope.  The  glabella  is  developed  only  to  a  moderate  degree.  Though  the  lips  are 
designated  as  of  medium  thickness  (PI.  xxxvi,  B),  it  is  obvious  that  if  our  stand- 
ards were  more  sensitive  we  should  find  that  they  were  somewhat  above  the  aver- 
age in  thickness.  As  a  group  the  Tongans  are  not  prognathous.  However  it  is 
safe  to  say  that  the  face  is  more  projecting  than  that  of  the  European.  The  chin 
is  positive  but  not  so  prominent  a  feature  as  that  of  Europeans.  (See  PI.  xxxvii, 
A  and  xxxvii,  B.)  The  ears  are  large  but  offer  no  points  of  special  interest. 
The  rim  on  the  lingual  surface  of  the  upper  incisor  teeth  is  typically  not  well 
developed.  It  was  noticed,  however,  in  what  may  be  termed  a  moderate  degree 
of  frequency. 


NASAL 

NASAL 

[lEIGUT 

INDEX 

AUTHOR 

49.0 

91.0 

Tremearne 
Martin 

57.5 

77.6 

Sullivan 
Martin 

48.0 

91.1 

Martin 

47.0 

92.9 

Tremearne 

49.0 

87.9 

Van  der  Sande 

53.0 

83.7 

Van  der  Sande 

59.8 

73.6 

Sullivan 

52.2 

83.1 

Boas 

56.5 

75.5 

Hrdlicka 

40.5 

106.0 

Reed 

49.0 

85.2 

Ten  Kate 

50.0 

82.0 

Folkmar 

51.0 

80.5 

Folkmar 

49.0 

84.1 

Folkmar 
Martin 

55.0 

73.T 

Folkmar 

47.0 

85.0 

Martin 

51.2 

78.9 

Joyce 

52.6 

74.8 

Christie 

58.3 

68.8 

Sullivan 

45.1 

86.9 

Garrett 

44.3 

88.0 

Garrett 

49.3 

78.1 

Joyce 

44.0 

86.5 

Fawcett 

55.9 

68.0 

Koganei 

40.0 

95.0 

Bean 

42.7 

88.2 

Martin 

48.7 

76.6 

Martin 

51.0 

72.6 

Fishberg 

53.0 

69.8 

Fishberg 

49.9 

74.7 

Joyce 

[20j 


Sullhan — Tongan  Somatology 
COMPARISON  OF  THE  TONGANS  WITH  THE  SAMOANS 


251 


Researches  during  the  past  year  provide  the  necessary  data  for  a  comparison 
of  the  Tongans  and  the  Sanioans,  and  it  is  practicable  to  make  the  comparison 
somewhat  more  detailed  than  is  usual,  because  both  groups  were  studied  by  the 
same  men,  and  differences  in  method  and  technique  can  therefore  be  largely  ignored. 

In  Table  V  the  standard  deviations  and  coefficients  of  variation  are  com- 
pared. The  Samoan  series  is  somewhat  noteworthy  for  its  relative  homogeneity 
when  compared  with  existing  groups  of  man.  As  a  group  the  Tongans  show 
noticeably  more  variation  than  the  Samoans.  In  thirteen  of  the  nineteen  characters 
under  discussion  the  Tongans  are  more  variable  than  the  Samoans — a  statement 
which  applies  to  both  sexes.  In  the  six  characters  in  which  the  Samoans 
exceed  the  Tongans  in  range,  the  excess  is  very  slight.  In  most  of  the  characters 
in  which  the  Tongans  are  the  more  variable  the  excess  is  appreciably  larger.  In 
both  groups  the  variability  as  expressed  by  the  coefficient  of  variation  is  consider- 
ably greater  in  the  males  than  in  the  females. 

In  comparing  the  averages  of  the  two  groups  for  each  anthropometric  char- 
acter shown  in  Table  VI  and  the  frequencies  of  the  attribute  characters  shown  in 
Table  VII,  the  very  close  correspondence  of  the  Tongans  to  the  Samoans  is  striking 
in  every  character  that  lends  itself  to  accurate  measurement.  Most  of  the  differ- 
ences occurring  might  well  be  regarded  as  chance  differences.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered again  that  small  differences  in  distribution  in  the  attribute  or  descriptive 
characters  are  not  to  be  taken  too  seriously. 


TABLE   V.      COMPARISON'    OF   STANDARD   DEVIATIONS  AND    COEFFICIENTS    OF    VARIATION    IN 

SAMOAN    AND    TONGAN    SERIES 

CHARACTER                                                                        MALF.  FEMALE 

S.  D.  ±  V.  in  per  cent  S.  D.  ^;  V.  in  per  cent 

Samoan     Tongan  Samoan  Tongan  Samoan    Tongan  Samoan  Tongan 

1.  Stature  5.25      5.21  3.05  3.01  4.92  5.83      3.05  3.58 

2.  Head  length  5.69      6.89  2.98  3.60  5.22  6.47      2.85  3.51 

3.  Head  width  4.46      4.26  2.88  2.75  3.87  5.06  2.61  3.37 

4.  Mininumi  frontal  5.98      4.87  5.78  4.64  3.96  4.65  3.90  4.51 

5.  Face  width  5.23      5.94  3.59  4.13  3.79  6.03  2.77  4.43 

6.  Bigonial   5.13       5.81  4.90  5.54  3.93  4.80  3.96  4.83 

7.  Face  height  6.56      6.81  5.00  5.31  6.41  5.79  5.30  4.66 

8.  Nose  height   3.64      3.91  6.09  6.80  4.53  3.75  8.34  6.61 

9.  Nose  width  2.59      3.02  5.91  6.80  2.56  2.86  6.21  6.82 

10.  Ear  height  4.23       4.57  6.39  6.92  3.33  3.97  5.44  6.15 

11.  Ear  width  2.76      2.62  7.84  7.59  2.30  2.35  6.84  7.03 

12.  Cephalic  index  3.53      3.14  4.34  3.87  2.98  4.09  3.68  5.01 

13.  Fronto-parietal   index  3.30       3.51  4.94  5.19  3.12  3.22  4.54  4.68 

14.  Cephalo-facial  index  2.84      4.68  3.01  5.04  2.63  3.23  2.84  3.54 

15.  Zygomatico-f rental  index  3.55       4.23  5.01  5.78  3.34  3.33  4.49  4.41 

16.  Zygomatico-mandibiilar  index  3.84      4.56  5.42  6.22  3.50  3.57  4.83  4.92 

17.  Facial  index  4.87      4.43  5.42  4.96  5.03  4.32  5.60  4.75 

18.  Nasal   index   5.86      7.58  7.96  9.76  7.99  6.15  10.47  8.28 

19.  Ear  index  3.79      3.93  7.11  7.50  4.53  3.93  8.25  7.58 

[21] 


252 


Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Museum 


TABLE     VI.       COMPARISON     OF     AVEIt.\GES  OF     ANTHROPOMETRIC  CHARACTERS     OF 

TONGANS    AND    SAMOANS 

CHARACTER  MALE  FEMALE 

12  3  4  5  6 

A,  A2  Ai-A=     Vei=  +  e2=  A,  A, 

Sanioan  Tongan  Sanioan  Tongati 

67-70  92-117  20-23  88-97 

Persons  Persons  Persons  Persons 

1.  Stature  171.7  173.0  +  1.3  .83  161.2  162.5 

2.  Head  length  190.6  191.0  +0.4  .93  183.0  184.1 

3.  Head  width  154.8  154.8  0.0  .67  148.1  150.0 

4.  Minimum  frontal  103.4  104.8  +  1.4  .85  101.5  103.0 

5.  Face  width  145.9  143.5  —2.4-  .84  136.5  136.1 

6.  Bigonial    104.6  104.8  +0.2  .82  99.0  99.2 

7.  Face   height   131.1  128.2  —2.9-  1.01  121.1  124.1 

8.  Nose  height   59.8  57.5  —2.3'  .56  54.3  56.7 

9.  Nose  width  43.8  44.4  +0.6  .41  41.2  41.9 

10.  Ear   height   66.1  66.0  —0.1  .65  61.2  64.5 

11.  Ear  width  35.2  34.5  —0.7  .41  33.6  33.4 

12.  Cephalic  index  81.3  81.1  —0.2  .51  80.8  81.6 

13.  Fronto-parietal  index  66.8  67.6  +  0.8  .51  68.8  68.7 

14.  Cephalo- facial  index  94.2  92.8  -1.4=  .55  92.4  91.2 

15.  Zygomatico-frontal    index    70.9  73.1  +2.2'  .58  74.5  75.4 

16.  Zygomatico-mandibular  index  71.7  73.2  +  1.5  .62  72.5  72.5 

17.  Facial  index  89.9  89.2  —0.7  .72  89.8  90.8 

18.  Nasal  index   73.6  77.6  +  4.0i  .99  76.3  74.2 

19.  Ear  index  53.3  32.4  —0.9  .58  54.9  51.8 


7 
A,-.\, 


+  1.3 
+  1.1 
+  1.9 
+  1.5 

—  0.4 
+  0.2 
+  3.0 
+  2.4 
4-0.7 
+  3.3 

—  0.2 
+  0.8 

—  0.1 

—  1.2 
+  0.9 

0.0 
+  1.0 

—  2.1 

—  3.1 


In  Table  VI  the  Samoan  male  averages  are  given  in  column  i  and  the 
Tongan  male  averages  in  column  2.  The  differences  of  the  two  averages  with  the 
Samoans  as  a  standard  are  given  in  column  3,  superior  figure  i  indicating  possible 
significant  difference  and  superior  figure  2  an  approach  to  significant  difference. 
These  differences  are  compared  with  the  magnitude  of  the  errors  of  the  averages  in 
column  4.  Unless  a  difference  in  column  3  is  three  times  as  great  as  the  magnitude 
of  the  errors  in  column  4,  it  is  not  regarded  as  significant.  Columns  5,  6,  and  7 
give  the  same  data  for  the  females  as  are  given  in  columns  i,  2,  and  3  for  males 
The  differences  in  the  females  are  less  significant  on  account  of  the  size  of  the 
Samoan  sample. 


TABLE    VII.       COMPARISON     OF    ATTRIBUTE    CHARACTERS     IN     TONGANS    AND     SAMOANS 


CHARACTER 


ON    A    PERCENTAGE    BASIS 


Samoan 
67-70 

Persons 


Skin   color   Medium 

(unexposed  part) brown 

Von  Luschan's  numbers 14,  15,  16 


[22] 


MALE 

FEMALE 

Tongan 

Samoan 

Tongan 

92-118 

20-23 

88-97 

Persons 

Persons 

Persons 

Medium 

Medium 

Medium 

brown 

brown 

brown 

14,  15, 16, 

17 

13,14,15 

13,14,15,16 

Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology 


253 


CHARACTER 


MALE 


Hair   form 

Straight 

Low  waves 
Deep  waves 

Curly  

Frizzly    

Woolly    

[air  colo 
Black  . 
Dark  b 

iinount  c 
None  . 
Scant  . 
Mediiin 
Heavy 

None  . 
Scant  . 
Median 
Heavy 

None  . 
Scant  . 
Mediun 
Heavy 

ye  color 
Black  . 
Dark  b 
Light  1 
Blue  ... 

onjuncti 
Clear  . 
Not  cl< 

^picanthi 
Absent 
Trace  . 
Mediur 
Markec 

Nasal  bridge 

Low  

Medium    .. 
High  


Samoan 

55.1 

27.5 

10.1 

5.8 

1.4 

0 


Tongan 

41.5 
41.5 
14.4 

2.5 
0 
0 


FEMALE 

Samoan 

Tongan 

47.8 

34.4 

39.1 

46.9 

8.8 

12.5 

0 

5.2 

4.3 

1.0 

0 

0 

Hair  color 

Black  

91.4                       94.1 

56.9 

87.6 

Dark  brown  

4.3                        4.2 

8.8 

4.1 

Amount  of  hair — males  only 

UPPER  CHEEK 

CHIN 

None  

10.1                                     2.1 

0 

0 

Scant  

46.3                       15.8 

23.2 

19.4 

Medium 

31.9                      33.7 

27.5 

30.6 

Heavy  

11.5                      48.4 

49.2 

50.0 

LOWER    CHEEK 

CHEST 

None  

14.5                        4.2 

59.7 

23.4 

Scant  

43.3                      37.2 

22.3 

28.7 

Medium    

23.2                       18.1 

14.9 

25.5 

Heavy  

18.8                      40.4 

3.0 

22.3 

FOREARM 

LEG 

None  ;. 

3.0                                     0 

0 

0 

Scant  

19.1                       10.5 

7.2 

7.3 

Medium 

35.3                      43.2 

42.0 

66.7 

Heavy  

42.6                      46.3 

50.7 

26.0 

MALE 

FEMALE 

Eye  color 

Black  

2.9                        3.4 

13.0 

15.5 

Dark  brown  

97.1                       94.1 
0                        2.5 

82.6 

4.3 

814 

Light  brown  

2.1 

Blue  

0                           0 

0 

1.0 

Conjunctiva 

Clear  

23.5                       18.8 

45.4 

42.7 

Not  clear  

76.5                      81.2 

54.6 

57.3 

Epicanthic  eye  fold 

Absent 

68.1                       56.8 

47.8 

53.6 

Trace  

27.5                      29.7 

43.4 

26.8 

Medium    

2.8                        8.1 
1.4                        5.4 

8.8 
0 

14  4 

Marked  

5.2 

21.4 
64.3 
14.3 


21.7 

70.4 

7.8 


56.9 

39.1 

4.3 


30.5 

67.4 

2.1 


[23] 


254 


Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Museum 


CHARACTER                                                                MALE  FEMALE 

Samoan                       Tongan                   Samoan  Tongan 
Axes  of  nostrils 

Anterior   posterior   2.9                         1.7                         0  5.3 

Oblique  57.3                      78.3                   39.1  69.5 

Transverse  39.7                       20.0                    60.9  25.3 

Slope  of  forehead 

Vertical    40.0                       60.3                    85.7  84.4 

Moderate    58.5                       38.8                    14.3  15.6 

Low  1.5                          .9                       0  0 

Glabella 

Smooth  29.4                       49.1                   100.0  83.5 

Medium ,     55.8                       42.8                         0  15.5 

Prominent 14.7                          8.0                          0  1.0 

Lips 

Thin 0                      10.3                     4.3  10.3 

Medium 92.8                       83.6                    91.4  87.6 

Thick    7.1                         6.0                      4.3  2.1 

Prognathism 

None  56.7                      53.3                   69.6  46.4 

Slight    23.8                       22.0                    13.0  37.1 

Medium 17.8                       24.6                    17.4  15.5 

Marked  1.4                            0                        0  1.0 

Keilodonty 
Lateral  incisor  teeth: 

No  rim  51.5                       42.1                     57.1  36.3 

Trace  of  rim  34.3                       42.9                    23.8  40.6 

M^rSrlm} ''■'                         ^^^                     l^-O  23.1 

Mesial  incisor  teeth: 

No  rim  68.2                       57.9                    76.0  62.6 

Trace  of  rim  25.7                       29.8                    14.3  26.4 

Medium  rim)                             ^/^                        ,^,                      „.  ,„„ 

Marked  rim} ^"^                        ^^.3                      9.5  10.9 

Although  the  differences  are  small  it  may  be  profitable  to  further  analyze 
those  that  do  occur.  Head  length  and  breadth  and,  consequently,  the  cephalic  index 
are  almost  identical  in  the  two  groups,  but  the  Tongans  have  slightly  lower,  nar- 
rower faces,  lower  noses,  a  higher  average  nasal  index  and  lower  average  cephalo- 
facial  indices.  There  is  also  noticeable  a  slightly  greater  tendency  to  have  wavy  or 
curly  hair.  Beards  are  slightly  heavier  and  body  hair  more  plentiful.  There  is 
more  conjunctival  pigment  in  the  Tongans  and  a  higher  frequency  of  the  epicanthic 
eye  fold.     There  are  fewer  highly  arched  nasal  bridges. 

[24.1 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology  255 

EVIDENCES  OF  MELANESIAN   INTERMIXTURE 

Although  the  differences  between  Tongans  and  Samoans  are  v^ery  slight,  yet 
almost  without  exception  they  point  in  the  direction  of  Melanesia.  Of  the  Samoans' 
I  said  that  considering  the  grouj)  as  a  unit  there  seems  to  be  very  little  Melancsian 
blood  in  evidence.  On  the  basis  of  cultural  or  linguistic  affinities  it  is  common  to 
assume  a  large  amount  of  Melanesian  blood  in  all  Polynesian  groups.  If  such  blood 
exists  it  should  be  easily  demonstrable.  Melanesian  intermixture  should  result  in 
a  lower  stature,  longer  heads,  broader,  shorter  noses,  shorter  ears,  more  curly, 
frizzly,  or  woolly  hair,  more  beard  and  body  hair,  a  smaller  transverse  fronto- 
parietal index,  a  lower,  narrower  face,  greater  prognathism,  and  a  heavier  develop- 
ment of  the  glabella  and  supra-orbital  region.  A  large  percentage  of  the  difference 
between  Tongans  and  Samoans  is  of  a  nature  that  from  purely  theoretical  reasons 
I  suggested  might  be  expected  to  result  from  Melanesian  mixture.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  there  are  few  or  no  careful  and  detailed  descriptions  of  those  Melanesian 
groups  that  arc  geographically  nearest  to  the  Tongans  and  very  meager  data  from 
the  area  as  a  whole.  In  order  to  state  with  any  finality  what  might  be  expected 
from  the  mixture  of  Polynesians  and  Melanesians,  in  lieu  of  any  absolute  data  on 
the  question,  detailed  and  accurate  descriptions  of  several  living  Melanesian  groups 
would  at  least  be  necessary. 

Assuming,  however,  that  I  have  stated  with  approximate  accuracy  what 
might  be  expected  in  such  a  mixture,  the  analysis  can  be  carried  a  step  further. 
As  a  test  woolly,  frizzly,  curly,  deeply  waved,  and,  to  a  less  extent,  low-waved  hair, 
may  be  taken  to  indicate  Melanesian  physical  mixture.  .  If  it  does  indicate  Melane- 
sian mixture  and  this  mixture  has  taken  place  on  a  large  scale  within  fairly  recent 
times,  it  is  to  be  expected  that  persons  with  wavy  and  curly  hair  will  show  other 
Melanesian  characteristics.  By  this  I  do  not  mean  that  there  is  necessarily  any 
high  correlation  between  the  combinations  in  which  physical  characters  are  inher- 
ited when  two  races  mix  but  that,  purely  on  the  basis  of  chance,  if  curly,  wavy 
hair  indicates  the  presence  of  Melanesian  blood,  it  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  the 
curly,  wavy-haired  group,  as  a  unit,  will  show  a  closer  approach  to  the  Melanesian 
average  than  will  the  straight-haired  group. 

Accordingly  I  have  divided  my  material  on  the  basis  of  hair  form  into  three 
groups.  The  first  group  includes  the  straight-haired  persons,  the  second  group 
those  with  low  waved  hair,  and  the  third  group  includes  all  with  deeply-waved, 
curly,  or  frizzly  hair.  I  have  compared  these  three  groups  with  the  total  series. 
The  averages  of  the  three  groups  do  not  necessarily  equal  the  averages  of  the  total 
series  since  the  data  for  a  number  of  persons  who  were  doubtfully  marked  "straight 
to  low  waves"  or  "low  waves  to  deep  waves"  were  excluded  in  making  up  the 

"  Op.  cit.,  p.  g6. 

[2S] 


256 


Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Museum 


smaller  groups.  In  seriating  these  doubtful  types  of  hair  form  in  the  summary,  I 
alternately  placed  one  of  these  in  the  lower  class  and  one  in  the  upper  class.  In 
obtaining  averages  of  groups  based  on  hair  form,  it  seemed  best  to  exclude  the 
data  marked  "doubtful."  The  averages  for  the  anthropometric  characters  in  these 
four  groups  will  be  found  in  Table  VIII. 

TABLE    VIII. — .\VER.\GES    OF     ANTHROPOMETRIC     CHARACTERS     FOR    TONGANS     WITH     DIFFERENT 

TYPES   OF    HAIR   FORM 


MEN 

Character  Total  group 

1.  Stature  173.0 

2.  Head  length  191.0 

3.  Head  width  154.8 

4.  Minimum    frontal    104.8 

5.  Face  width  143.5 

7.  Face  height  128.2 

8.  Nose  height 57.5 

9.  Nose  width  44.4 

12.  Cephalic  index  81.1 

13.  Fronto-parietal    index 67.6 

14.  Cephalo-facial  index 92.8 

17.  Facial  index  89.2 

18.  Nasal  index  77.6 

WOMEN 

Character  Total  group 

1.  Stature  162.5 

5.  Face  width  136.1 

7.  Face  height  124.1 

8.  Nose  height  56.7 

9.  Nose  width  41.9 

12.  Cephalic  index  81.6 

13.  Fronto-parietal  index  68.7 

14.  Cephalo-facial  index  91.2 

18.  Nasal   index   74.2 


Deep-waved 

Straight  hair 

I,o\v-waved  hair 

to  woolly  hair 

171.0 

173.9 

173.2 

189.3 

193.2 

192.2 

154.3 

155.2 

156.9 

102.4 

106.1 

103.3 

144.7 

145.2 

143.9 

129.7 

129.0 

128.3 

58.9 

57.8 

57.0 

44.3 

44.8 

45.6 

81.3 

80.3 

81.8 

66.3 

68.3 

66.0 

93.7 

93.7 

91.9 

89.8 

88.9 

89.3 

7S.S 

N 

77.7 

80.4 

Deep-waved 

Straight  hair 

Low-waved  hair 

to  woolly  hair 

161.3 

163.1 

162.3 

137.0 

137.2 

136.4 

124.0 

124.5 

123.3 

57.3 

56.8 

56.1 

42.1 

41.9 

41.8 

81.0 

82.2 

81.2 

69.1 

67.9 

69.3 

91.5 

91.0 

90.9 

73.6 

74.2 

74.7 

There  are  no  consistent  differences  between  the  straight-haired  and  the 
low-waved  groups.  But  in  the  groups  containing  the  persons  with  deeply  waved, 
curly,  frizzly,  and  woolly  hair  we  notice  that  the  averages  again  point  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Melanesia.  The  faces  are  lower  and  narrower,  the  noses  are  lower  and 
wider,  the  average  cephalo-facial  index  is  lower  and  the  nasal  index  is  higher. 

Emphasizing,  then,  more  the  nature  than  the  magnitude  of  the  difference, 
I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  in  those  traits  in  which  the  Tongans  differ  from  the 
Samoans  the  differences  may  probably  be  attributed  to  Melanesian  intermixture. 


[26] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology  257 

DISCUSSION  AND  CONCLUSIONS 

Comparison  of  the  Tongans  with  the  Sanioans  has  thus  shown  remarkably 
close  resemblance  between  these  two  groups  in  almost  every  detail.  The  few  small 
differences  might  well  be  considered  as  accidental  or  as  reflecting  slight  local 
differences,  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  they  point  in  the  main  in  one  direction. 
From  the  general  direction  of  these  differences  it  seems  most  reasonable  to  assume 
that  they  are  the  result  of  IMelanesian  intermixture. 

In  another  publication'  I  stated  that  I  saw  no  reason  for  assuming  any 
appreciable  amount  of  Melanesian  blood  in  Samoa.  Perhaps  this  statement  should 
be  qualified  to  make  its  meaning  clearer.  The  census  returns  show  that  there  are 
in  Samoa  and  Tonga  a  considerable  number  of  natives  of  Fiji  and  other  Melanesian 
islands.  In  both  of  these  island  groups  there  are  persons  of  known  and  admittedly 
mixed  Melanesian-Polynesian  parentage.  These  facts  are  known  and  require  no 
anthropological  research  to  establish  them.  In  view  of  these  facts  it  is  desirable  to 
determine  to  what  extent  the  population  styling  itself  as  of  pure  Samoan  or  of  pure 
Tongan  origin  has  been  in  the  past  affected  by  Melanesian  intermixture. 

This  problem  can  be  solved  only  by  determining  the  degrees  of  differences 
and  likenesses  in  the  groups  concerned.  The  results,  however,  can  be  expressed 
only  in  general  terms,  for  there  are  no  known  factors  in  the  equation.  From  the 
marked  general  differences  in  physical  type  between  Samoans  and  Melanesians  I 
conclude  that  the  amount  of  Melanesian  blood  in  Samoa  is  very  small.  This  may 
be  due  to  the  fact  that  intermixture  never  took  place  on  a  very  large  scale  in  Samoa, 
or  that  if  it  did  take  place  on  a  large  scale  it  was  so  long  ago  that  the  Melanesian 
element  is  almost  completely  absorbed  by  the  general  Samoan  population. 

In  Tonga  conditions  are  somewhat  different.  Enough  Melanesian  blood  is 
in  evidence  to  alter  noticeably  the  average  physical  type.  But  such  correlation  exists 
between  the  various  Melanesian  traits  in  individuals  and  groups  that  when  individ- 
uals are  classed  on  the  basis  of  one  Melanesian  trait  the  averages  in  many  other 
traits  also  reflect  the  Melanesian  intermixture  more  clearly  than  do  the  Tongans 
as  a  whole. 

From  this  it  may  be  assumed  that  the  Melanesian  element  in  Tonga  is  either 
comparatively  recent  or  considerable  in  amount.  The  chances  are  in  favor  of  recent 
rather  than  great  intermixture,  but  since  skeletal  material  of  known  chronological 
sequence  is  lacking,  no  definite  conclusion  is  possible.  It  may  be  said,  however, 
that  without  much  doubt  there  is  considerably  more  Melanesian  blood  in  the  general 
Tongan  population  than  there  is  in  the  general  Samoan  population. 

In  their  broader  racial  affinities  the  Samoans  and  Tongans  are  very  similar, 
and  therefore  what  I  have  said  of  the  Samoans  holds  for  the  Tongans.     Never- 

'  Op.  cit. 

[27] 


258  Memoirs  Bernicc  P.  Bishop  Museum 

theless  it  seems  desirable  to  repeat  the  discussion  in  my  paper  on  Samoan  Soma- 
tology'* and  to  extend  it  somewhat. 

I  have  stated  my  belief  that  there  was  little  or  no  reason  for  assuming  the 
Samoans  to  be  of  European  or  Caucasian  origin.  From  the  evidence  available  I 
have  concluded  that  the  Samoans  are  of  Mongoloid  or  Yellow-Brown  affinities. 
Scientific  opinion  has  wavered  back  and  forth  on  the  question  as  to  whether  there 
was  or  was  not  justification  for  calling  the  yellow  and  the  brown  elements  of  this 
stock  separate  races.  Everyone  must  admit  that  there  is  some  justification  for  so 
doing.  Superficially  there  are  some  striking  dififerences  in  the  two  stocks.  When 
all  the  groups  composing  this  stock  are  considered,  anthropologists  have  found  that 
the  two  elements  have  a  considerable  number  of  very  important  characteristics  in 
common.  One  group  may  depart  radically  from  the  other  groups  in  one  or  two 
characters  but  in  all  other  characters  will  approach  the  form  prevailing  in  the 
majority  of  the  groups.  At  present  the  line  of  cleavage  between  the  yellow  and 
brown  elements  of  this  stock  seems  to  be  rather  well  marked.  This  is  probablv 
due  not  to  the  fact  that  such  a  gap  exists  but  that  our  data  is  lacking  on  many 
interesting  and  connecting  types.  The  Chinese,  the  Japanese,  the  Koreans,  the 
numerous  Siberian  peoples,  and  many  other  similar  Asiatic  groups  constitute  the 
yellow  element  of  this  group.  The  American  Indians,  the  Malays,  the  Indonesians 
and  in  my  opinion  the  Polynesians  constitute  the  brown  element  of  the  Yellow- 
Brown  race.  Each  one  of  these  groups  named  represents  a  departure  from  the 
other  groups  in  a  greater  or  less  number  of  important  characteristics.  Yet 
analysis  reveals  a  large  number  of  remaining  characteristics  pointing  clearly  to  its 
major  affinities. 

It  is  for  this  reason  that  I  insist  that  no  classification  based  on  hair  form, 
cephalic  index,  or  any  one  single  character  should  be  taken  too  seriously.  It  may 
very  well  be  that  the  one  character  which  was  hit  upon  as  a  basis  for  classifica- 
tion may  be  the  very  one  in  which  the  group  under  discussion  has  become  dififer- 
entiated  from  its  closest  relatives.  Relationship  must  be  based  on  a  totality  of 
characters — the  larger  the  number  of  physical  characters  used  in  indicating  rela- 
tionships the  greater  the  probability  that  the  relationship  indicated  is  a  real  one. 

The  evidence  for  a  Caucasian  origin  of  the  Samoans  and  Tongans  is 
decidedly  sparse  and  unconvincing.  They  do  depart  somewhat  from  the  bulk  of 
the  Yellow-Brown  peoples  in  hair  form.  Coarse,  stiff,  or  lank  black  hair  occurs 
only  rarely  in  these  two  groups.  The  prevailing  form  is  moderately  coarse  in 
texture  and  either  straight  or,  quite  as  often,  slightly  wavy  in  form.  This  more 
than  any  other  one  thing  is  responsible  for  the  theory  of  a  European  origin  of 
these  peoples.  Now  while  the  hair  is  not  so  stiff,  straight,  and  coarse  as  the 
prevailing  form  of  hair  in  the  Yellow-Brown  peoples,  neither  is  it  so  fine  as  the 

"  Op.  cit. 

[28] 


Sullivan — Tongan  Somatology 


259 


prevailing  hair  form  of  the  Caucasians.  I  do  not  wish,  however,  to  make  too 
much  of  this  point  and  am  wilhng  to  grant  that  in  this  one  character  the  Samoans 
and  Tongans  approach  nearer  to  the  Caucasian  than  to  the  Yellow-Brown  types. 
The  same  can  be  said  of  the  lack  of  prognathism  and  of  the  development  of  the 
chin.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that  the  Polynesians  arc  not  alone  among  the 
Yellow-Browns  in  thus  ap])roaching  a  Caucasian  norm.  Certain  American  Indians 
approach  the  Caucasian  norms  even  more  closely  in  the  lack  of  prognathism,  ele- 
vation of  the  nose,  and  in  the  develoimient  of  the  chin. 

A  few  other  characters  upon  which  we  have  data  are  intermediate  between 
the  prevailing  Caucasian  and  Yellow-Brown  norms.  In  detail  these  are  hair  tex- 
ture, amount  of  beard,  amount  of  body  hair,  size,  shape  and  direction  of  the 
palpebral  fissure  (eye  opening),  low  frequency  of  the  epicanthic  eye  fold,  low 
frequency  of  the  enamel  rim  on  the  upper  incisor  teeth,  the  size  of  the  teeth,  the 
hair  color  (occasionally  a  slight  brownish  tint  in  sunlight)  and  the  cephalo-facial 
index. 

But  in  skin  color,  eye  color,  the  amovint  of  conjunctival  pigment,  the  eleva- 
tion of  the  nasal  bridge,  the  form  and  direction  of  the  nostrils,  nasal  height,  nasal 
breadth,  nasal  index,  the  thickness  of  the  lips,  the  large  massive  faces  reflected 
in  the  face  height,  face  width,  and  bigonial  width,  the  Samoans  and  the  Tongans 
differ  from  the  Caucasians  and  approach  more  nearly  the  norms  of  the  brown 
division  of  the  Yellow-Brown  race.  These  characters  may  be  summarized  in 
tabular  form  as  follows: 


TAliLE    IX. RACI.VL    AFFINITIES    OF    THE    TONGANS    AND    SAMOANS 


A.    .Approach  Caucasian 
norms  in : 

Hair  form 

Lack  of  prognathism 

Chin  development 


B.     Intermediate    between    Cau- 
casian   and    Yellow-Brown 
in : 

Hair  texture 
.\mount  of  beard 
.■\mount  of  body  hair 
Form  of  palpebral  fissure 
Absence  of  eye  fold 
Absence  of  incisor  rim 
Hair  color 
Cephalo-facial  index 


C.   Approach  Yellow-Brown 
norm  in : 

Skin  color 
Eye  color 

Conjunctival  pigment 
Nasal  bridge 
Xostrils 
Nasal  height 
Nasal  breadth 
Nasal  index 
Lips 
Face  width 
Face  height 
Bigonial  diameter 

It  will  be  noted  that  many  characters  occurring  in  both  races  but  distinctive 
of  neither  have  been  omitted.  I  may  likewise  have  laid  myself  open  to  criticism 
by  assigning  any  one  character  exclusively  to  one  race.  This  has  been  done  con- 
sciously for  the  sake  of  clearness  in  presentation.     In  saying,  for  example,  that 

[29] 


26o  Memoirs  Bernice  P.  Bishop  Museum 

the  Tongans  and  Samoans  approach  the  norm  of  the  Yellow-Brown  race  in  skin 
color,  I  say  it  knowing  that  a  few  Caucasian  groups  have  a  skin  color  nearer  to 
that  of  the  Tongans  and  Samoans  than  to  many  Yellow-Brown  groups.  Yet  on 
the  whole  hrown  skin  is  more  distinctive  of  the  Yellow-Brown  peoples  than  it  is 
of  the  Caucasians.  I  have  also  perhaps  heen  somewhat  too  generous  in  admitting 
that  certain  characters  approach  the  Caucasian  norm  when  they  also  approach 
the  norms  of  other  race  groups.  While  I  have  said  that  in  the  amount  of  beard 
and  body  hair  the  Samoans  and  Tongans  approach  the  Caucasian  norms  it  should 
be  remembered  that  in  these  respects  they  approach  just  as  closely  the  Melanesian 
norm. 

Beyond  saying  that  the  bulk  of  the  data  at  hand  seems  to  point  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  Polynesians  under  discussion  belong  to  the  brown  division  of 
the  Yellow-Brown  race  in  the  same  sense  that  it  is  customary  to  regard  the 
American  Indians  as  members  of  this  race,  it  seems  unwise  to  go  further  at  this 
time.  From  this  it  should  not  be  assumed  that  the  relationship  of  the  Polynesians 
and  the  American  Indians  is  immediate  and  close.  At  present  I  would  not  care 
to  do  more  than  to  express  a  belief  that  the  relationship  existing  between  the 
Polynesians  and  the  American  Indians  is  considerably  closer  than  that  existing 
between  either  the  Polynesians  or  the  American  Indians  and  the  Chinese.  It  is 
probable,  however,  that  closer  relatives  to  the  Polynesian  will  be  found  nearer  at 
hand. 


[30] 


Bkrnice  p.  Bishop  Musrum 


Memoirs,  Voi.umk  VIII,  Plate  XXXVI 


A.     TONGAN  TYPES  SHOWING  THE  Rv\NGE  OF  VARIATION   IN   EYE   FORM,  THE   CHARACTERISTIC    HAEF- 

OPEN   EYES   SOMEWHAT  OBLIQUELY   PLACED,   AND   THE   SLIGHTLY   THICKENED   AND    nEVELLED    LOWER 

LID  WITH    lUST  A   SUGGESTION  OF  AN   EPICANTHIC  FOLD. 


B.  TONGAN  TYPES  SHOWING  THE  FORM  OF  THE  LIPS,  NOS.  I  TO  4  IN  MEN  AND  NOS.  5  TO  8  IN 
WOMEN.  NOS.  2,  3,  6,  AND  7  ARE  THE  MOST  COMMON  TYPES.  AS  A  GROUP  THE  TONGANS  HAVE 
LIPS  OF   SOMEWHAT    MORE   THAN    MEDIUM    THICKNESS,    DIFFERING   QUITE    MARKEDLY    FROM    THOSE 

OF  CAUCASIAN   PEOPLE. 

Photographs  by  GifFord  and  McKern 


Berxice  p.  Risnnr  Mi^sei'm 


Memoirs,  Volume  VIM,  Pf.ate  XXXVII 


A.      PROFILES   OF  TONGAN    MEN   ARRANGED   IN   ORDER   OF    CHIN    DEVELOPMENT.       THE   TONGAN    CHIN 
THOUGH    POSITIVE   IS    BY   NO    MEANS  SO   PRONOUNCED   AS   THAT  OF   CAUCASIAN    PEOPLES.       NOS.    3,    4, 

5,   AND  6   PORTRAY  THE    MOST    COMMON    TYPES. 


B.       PROFILES    OF    TONGAN    WOMEN    ARRANGED    IN    ORDER    OF    CHIN    DEVELOPMENT.       THE    CHIN    OF 
TONGAN    WOMEN    IS   NOTICEABLY   LESS   DEVELOPED   THAN    THAT   OF    THE    MEN.       NOS.    3.    4.    5,    AND    6 

PORTRAY  THE   MOST   COMMON   TYPES. 

Photographs  by  GiflFord  and  McKern 


Bf.rnice  p.  Bishop  Museum 


Memoirs,  Volume  VIII.  Plate  XXXVIII 


A.      PROFILES  OF  TONGAN    MEN    SHOWING  TIIK   KLKVATION  OF  THE    NASAL    BRUKJE   AND  THE   PROFILE 

OF  THE    NOSE.       NOS.    7   AND  8   SHOW    A    HIGHLY    ELEVATED    NASAL    BRIDGE.       THE    NASAL    BRIDGE    OF 

THE  TONG.SNS   AS  A   GROIT   IS   NOT   ELEVATED  SO    MUCH    AS   THAT   OF   CAUCASIANS. 


B.      PROFILES  OP  TONGAN  WOMEN   SHOWING  THE  RANGE   IN    ELEVATION   OF  THE   NASAL   BRIDGE   AND 
THE  CONTOUR  OF  THE  NASAL  PROFILE.      THE   NASAL  BRIDGE  IS  SEEN   TO   BE   MODER.VTELY   ELEV.XTED. 

NO.   8    IS    AN    ABERRANT    AND    UNCOMMON    TYPE. 

Photographs  by  GifFord  and  McKern 


Bernice  p.  Bishop  Museum 


Memoirs,  Volume  VIII,  Plate  XXXIX 


TONGAN    TYPES   SHOWING   THE    RANGE    IN    NOSE    FORM,    NOS.    I    TO    4    IN    MEN    AND    NOS.    5    TO   8    IN 
WOMEN.      NOS.    2,    3,   6,   AND   7   ARE   THE    MOST    COMMON    FORMS.       NONE   OF    THE    NOSES    HERE    POR- 
TRAYED   APPROACHES    IN    SIZE    THE    CAUCASIAN    TYPES. 

Photographs  by  Gifford  and  McKern 


Vn^ 


RETURN        MARIAN  KOSHLAND  BIOSCIENCE  AND 
TO  — ►                 NATURAL  RESOURCE  LIBRARY 

2101  Valley  Life  Sciences  BIdg.    642-2531 

LOAN  PERIOD 

ONE  MONTH  LOAN 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AH  1  bR  7  DAYS. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW. 

DUE 

m " 

J34lUECTTORE( 
RPr«D  Bin 

M  00  0/  -i?0 

3  Pi',; 

FORM  NO.  DD  8 
24M    4-00 

UNIVERSITY  OF  C 
Berkele 

ALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
y,  California  94720-6500 

